Tom Yang wrote:
>
> <Jay and Tom:
>
> As the owner of a Series I, which has only three jacking points( the
> frame-leg on the left front corner has been torn/twisted off and is now
> being replaced with a piece of Series V -jacking point/bumper mount and
> about 8 inches of frame-leg), I agree with the emergency use only of the
> jack receiver points. I have been using the differential housing center
> in the rear and a wooden block on the center of the cross-member to
> raise the front. The rear should be o.k. but I have always wondered
> about using the front cross-member at all due to its weird shape.
> (Structurally, with a pad to distribute surface-loading, I think it is
> strong enough to resist normal jacking forces without distortion).
> Anyone out there disagree?
>
> P.S.: Another use of the jacking points is definitely to test the
> torsional rigidity of any car you're thinking of buying!
>
> Ron Tebo - Series I - B9000627>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> IMHO I feel that if you use a 2x4 to distribute the weight, the front
> cross-member should be fine. Besides, with all the oil leaking from the
> motor, it should be the least rusty thing on the car!
>
> As far as torsional rigidity goes, I would bet a solid Alpine flexes more
> than you'd believe!
>
> Tom
Tom:
Thanks for your opinion!
I think a solid one is pretty rigid, since I can jack mine up at any of
the three points I have, and still open the doors, but have tried this
on three others (one Series II and two Series V's). With one of the Vs,
the doors jammed before it was even off the ground ( owner later tore it
down for parts). The other two (one of which had sills repaired) had
very minor door problems even when fully jacked up with std jack.
Ron Tebo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 05 2000 - 10:06:05 CDT